The US Is Toast

[Lenno]

Remember the quislings. Remember who enabled the quislings, as the day approaches.

[Lenno]

Weekly Featured Profile — Shoshana Bricklin
Shoshana Bricklin is a Philadelphia marxist, lawyer and Democratic Party activist.
She has been involved in campaigns for Bricklin For Judge, Philadelphia City Councilman Curtis Jones, Jr. and is Legislative Policy Advisor to Councilwoman Cindy Bass.
She was an unsuccessful candidate for the Philadelphia Municipal Court in Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania in 2013.
Bricklin is very active in the Democratic Party and serves on the Philadelphia Ninth Ward Democratic Committee.
From 2008-2012, she was Legislative Counsel to the Philadelphia City Council.
In 1996, Shoshana Bricklin was a member of the Democratic Socialists of AmericaNational Political Committee. She had earlier co-founded the Philadelphia Marxist School.
She was an organizer of the Northwest Progressive Democratic Club, “ a project of the Northwest Philadelphia branch of DSA.”

[Lenno]

Why is FBI Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds Boiling Over Former Speaker Hastert’s Plea Deal?
She’s Launching a Campaign to Blow the Cover Off the Cover-Up!
Former Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, founder of Boiling Frogs Post, is boiling mad these days and has launched a campaign to blow the cover off the cover-up of powerful criminals, including pedophiles, operating at the highest levels of the United States government. The ACLU calls her a “silenced patriot.” Edmonds started the National Security Whistleblowers movement as a result of her findings and her treatment as she tried to report criminal activity within the U.S. government. The abject failure of federal investigators, as well as the U.S. media, to cover the rest of the Hastert crimes is what upsets Edmonds today. What exactly were Hastert’s crimes and what was he indicted for?
Dennis Hastert rose from wrestling and football coach at the local small-town high school in Yorkville, Illinois to become a U.S. Representative, and then Speaker of the House. His fall from grace will see him sentenced in February 2016 with what could be from months to years in prison. Edmonds, a Farsi and Turkish language speaker, was hired by the FBI to translate wiretaps and other intelligence on targeted individuals. In the course of her duties, according to Edmonds, with her Top Secret clearance, she learned of treason, blackmail of Members of Congress, bribery, and other criminal activities, including pedophilia. The information that Edmonds gleaned from the wiretaps that she was translating provides context for the White House scandal that became known as the “Valerie Plame Affair.” When Edmonds reported the content of this intelligence to her superiors, she eventually was slapped with a “State Secrets” gag order and prohibited from talking about what she learned. She skirted that gag order by placing photographs online of the targeted individuals whose conversations she had translated, thereby discovering their criminal activities. Finally, in 2009, as a result of another lawsuit on an entirely different subject, Edmonds was able to air her information publicly under oath. That deposition is here. Edmonds has written two books about her experiences, a memoir, Classified Woman, and a novel, The Lone Gladio.
The renewal of Edmonds’s ire came as the former Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, J. Dennis Hastert, appeared in Court defending himself against two felony accusations: one, that he withdrew cash from his bank account in a way to evade federal scrutiny and two, that he lied to investigators about the reason he was making the withdrawals. The media awkwardly reported Hastert’s clumsy situation; mentioning the indictment, even mentioning the “prior misconduct” against “Individual A,” while giving a complete pass on why “Individual A” was being paid $3.5 million by Hastert for hush money.

[Lenno]

After Paris jihad massacre, Lindsey Graham wants to double funding for Syrian “refugees” and bring even more to U.S.

November 15, 20153:30 pm By Robert Spencer 39 Comments
The time for this suicidal idiocy is long past. Graham is a presidential candidate? He ought to be laughed off the presidential debate stage, made to resign from the Senate, and barred from ever holding public office again. And if he succeeds in expanding the “refugee” program, he ought to be made to house the increased numbers of “refugees” in his home and Senatorial office.

“Forget Paris: Lindsey Graham to double funding for ‘refugees,'” by Leo Hohmann, WND, November 15, 2015:

In the wake of the deadly Paris attacks by ISIS, some GOP presidential candidates such as Ted Cruz, Donald Trump and even Marco Rubio are calling for an end to Syrian refugee resettlement in the U.S.
Most of the others have been silent or vague on the issue of Syrian refugees – about 2,000 of whom have already arrived in the U.S. despite warnings from the FBI that it’s impossible to vet their backgrounds.
But there is one candidate who is clearly on the record wanting more Syrian Muslims to pour into American cities and towns as “refugees,” despite the fact that at least one of the seven attackers in Paris had a Syrian passport and entered France as a “refugee.”
U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who positions himself as a war hawk against ISIS, is co-sponsoring legislation with Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., to nearly double the amount of funding Washington spends on resettling refugees from Syria.
On the day after the multi-pronged shooting and bombing attacks on Paris, which killed 129 civilians and injured 352, Graham pounced again on the theme that ISIS must be attacked at its core in Syria and destroyed, or there would be more attacks on Western cities.
One of Graham’s favorite talking points is, “If we don’t stop them over there, they are coming over here just as sure as I stand here in front of you.”
It’s curious, then, say his critics, that he would be pushing for escalating the importation of more Islamic refugees into U.S. cities and towns from the world’s most notorious hotbed of jihadist activity – Syria.
Graham’s press secretary did not respond to requests for comment from WND.
Without giving a number, Graham has said the U.S. should accept its “fair share” of Syrian refugees.
His bill provides some insight on what that number might be.
According to the Hill, the legislation doesn’t specify how many Syrian refugees should be accepted into the United States but the amount of funding requested would allow for the resettlement of up to 100,000 Syrian refugees over two years, Leahy’s office said.
Even President Obama has never explicitly said this many Syrians should be allowed into the U.S, although that could be his plan given the vague nature of his statements. Obama’s State Department has called for 10,000 Syrians to be admitted in 2016 and “many more” in 2017….

[Lenno]

Hamas-linked CAIR complains of post-Paris anti-Muslim “backlash”

November 18, 2015 9:25 am By Robert Spencer 27 Comments
Islamic supremacist groups such as the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) want and need hate crimes against Muslims, because they’re the currency they use to buy power and influence in our victimhood-oriented society, and to deflect attention away from jihad terror and onto Muslims as putative victims. Hamas-linked CAIR, designated a terror organization by the United Arab Emirates, and other Muslims have on many occasions not hesitated to stoop even to fabricating “hate crimes,” including attacks on mosques. Most notably, in February, a New Jersey Muslim was found guilty of murder that he tried to portray as an “Islamophobic” attack, and in 2014 in California, a Muslim was found guilty of killing his wife, after first blaming her murder on “Islamophobia.”
All that casts into doubt all the claims of victimhood in this article. Given the track record of Hamas-linked CAIR and other Muslims in the U.S., authorities should first investigate whether or not Muslims themselves issued these threats.
Also, no threats or violence against innocent people are ever justified, so where is Hamas-linked CAIR on Muslim persecution of Christians worldwide? The Muslims in this article say they’ve been threatened, while Muslims in Iraq, Syria and elsewhere are killing Christians, driving them from their homes, enslaving them, and more. Whence this moral myopia of the mainstream media?
Hooper and Awad: professional whiners

“US Muslims face backlash after Paris attacks,” by Dave Collins, Associated Press, November 18, 2015 (thanks to all who sent this in):

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Muslims around the U.S. are facing backlash following the deadly attacks in Paris, including vandalism to mosques and Islamic centers, hate-filled phone and online messages and threats of violence.
Advocacy leaders say they have come to expect some anti-Muslim sentiment following such attacks, but they now see a spike that seems notable, stirred by anti-Muslim sentiment in the media.
“The picture is getting increasingly bleak,” said Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the [Hamas-linked — ed.] Washington, D.C.-based Council on American-Islamic Relations. “There’s been an accumulation of anti-Islamic rhetoric in our lives and that I think has triggered these overt acts of violence and vandalism.”

Hooper wants to silence all criticism of Islam, in accord with Sharia blasphemy laws, and thus allow the jihad to advance unimpeded and unopposed. To sell this poisonous snake oil, he falsely claims that “anti-Islamic rhetoric,” by which he means any opposition to jihad terror, is leading to violence against Muslims.

He said the rise in the level of anti-Muslim sentiment is reflected by some GOP presidential candidates, governors and others speaking out in opposition to the U.S. accepting more Syrian refugees.
Hooper said the council is seeing an increase in anti-Muslim incidents since Friday’s attacks in Paris that killed 129 people and wounded more than 350.
In Connecticut, the FBI and local police are investigating reports of multiple gunshots fired at the Baitul Aman mosque in Meriden hours after the attacks.
Leaders of the mosque don’t know the motive of the shooter or shooters, said Salaam Bhatti, a spokesman for the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community in New York, to which the mosque belongs. The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community is a movement within Islam.
Bhatti said the shooting has not rattled mosque members. He said many are from Pakistan, where conditions for the Ahmadiyya movement are much worse.
“It’s a teachable moment,” Bhatti said. “As we do raise awareness of attacks in mosques, we will see mosques do not respond in violence. Islam teaches us to teach peace.”
At the University of Connecticut, authorities are investigating after the words “killed Paris” were discovered on Saturday written beneath an Egyptian student’s name on his dorm room door.
Muslim leaders also have reported recent vandalism, threats and other hate crimes targeting mosques in Nebraska, Florida, Texas, Kentucky, Virginia, Tennessee, Ohio, New York and other states.
After the Paris attacks:
— The Omaha Islamic Center in Nebraska reported that someone spray-painted a rough outline of the Eiffel Tower on an outside wall. The Council on American-Islamic Relations has called for the FBI and local police to investigate the incident as a possible hate crime, and they’re doing just that, according to Nasir Husain, general secretary of the center. Muslims in the central U.S. city are afraid, he said.
“We have men, women and children who come to the masjid to pray every day, and since these Paris attacks, they have reduced the frequency of their visits to the masjid with fear for their lives,” Husain said.
— In a suburb of Austin, Texas, leaders of the Islamic Center of Pflugerville on Monday discovered feces and torn pages of the Quran that had been thrown at the door of the mosque. Muslim leaders also encouraged authorities to investigate the act as a hate crime.
— In a suburb of Houston, Texas, authorities on Tuesday arrested a man accused of threatening on social media to “shoot up a mosque.” He was charged with making a terroristic threat, a felony.
— Two Tampa Bay-area mosques in Florida received threatening phone messages on Friday night. FBI officials said the same person made the calls to the Islamic Society of St. Petersburg and the Islamic Society of Pinellas County. The person was identified and interviewed over the weekend, but investigators found no actual plans to carry out acts of violence, the FBI said. One of the calls threatened a firebombing….

[Lenno]

BREAKING: Honduras Arrests Five Syrians With Fake Greek Passports Heading To U.S.A. – Three More Arrested In St. Maarten

Posted on November 18, 2015 by sundance
Two separate incidents with common attributes. Two independent groups of Syrian males traveling on fake Greek passports trying to gain entry into the U.S. The first group of three was identified/captured in Saint Maarten after a flight from Haiti. The second group of five were identified/captured in Honduras.
Group #2 – Honduran authorities have detained five Syrian nationals who were trying to reach the United States using stolen Greek passports, but there are no signs of any links to last week’s attacks in Paris, police said.



The group of Syrian men was held late on Tuesday in the Honduran capital of Tegucigalpa on arrival from Costa Rica and they were planning to head to the border with neighboring Guatemala. The passports had been doctored to replace the photographs with those of the Syrians, police said. (Reuters Link)
Another three Syrian men were arrested in St Marteen also with fake Greek Passports, and also seeming to head toward the U.S: Continue reading →

[Lenno]

Why is Obama so angry over the refugee issue?

Posted by Ann Corcoran on November 18, 2015
A couple of thoughts as I was doing other-of-life’s duties this afternoon….
Obama has staked his Presidency on changing America and one important, and arguably the most fundamental way to do that, is by changing the people—remember his Task Force on New Americans plan to colonize, to “seed” American towns with diversity? It is still going forward, but if those concerned with security succeed, that plan will be chilled somewhat as the numbers of ‘seedlings’ are reduced in this last full year of the scheme.
Obama is very angry today because he is not going to be awarded humanitarian of the year. He was expected to deliver America to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees by leading the world in resettling huge numbers of Syrian Muslims to your towns and cities. The way things are going, he could fail. See Unloading on Republicans: http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-pres...efusal-n465461

Indeed, the refugees aren’t even anywhere near the largest group of immigrants getting into the US these days, but their wide range of ethnic diversity makes them a critical part of the plan.
But that isn’t all of it…..
Obama must satisfy the United Nations

Obama must bring in a large number of Syrian refugees to carry out the United Nations agenda. For decades, the US has admitted half (or more than half) of the world’s resettled refugees and the UN uses that number to pressure other countries to take more. Oh, and when I say “resettled refugees” I don’t mean those migrants (and wannabe asylum seekers) on the move across Europe and elsewhere in the world.
I am talking about the refugees who are chosen by the United Nations which does the first screening and then persuades westernized countries to take them PERMANENTLY—to make them voting citizens of their new first-world country.
When the Syrian civil war began in earnest, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres told western countries that they must take-in for permanent resettlement 130,000 Syrians (again, these are mostly Syrians in UN camps, not those who have decided to move west—invasion-style—on their own).
And, so 65,000 became the magic number the US was expected to take. All of that is chronicled in several posts here at RRW in the last two years. (I should have explained where the 65,000 came from when I wrote this post.)
The UNHCR fully expected the US to take that number—65,000—long before now because if the US took the lead and moved aggressively to do that, the UNHCR would use it as a pressure point on the other countries dragging their feet on making commitments.
In that recent Georgetown gig we attended, Guterres hinted at the importance of the US leading the world (sort of like a Judas goat). Of course, Germany (and Merkel) are upstaging Obama now in the race for ‘humanitarian’ extraordinaire of the year and so….
Obama looks exceedingly weak for not being able to deliver America.

And, therefore he is really (really!) angry as he unloaded on GOP candidates’ earlier today, here.

[Lenno]

Obama’s New Counter-Terrorism Guru

The president finds an unlikely source of inspiration in his mishandling of the war on terror.

November 25, 2015
Caroline Glick
16
1827



Originally published by the Jerusalem Post.
Since the Islamic State attacks in Paris on November 13, we have seen the development of a new, and strange justification for the Obama administration’s insistent refusal to jettison its manifestly failed strategy of contending with IS specifically and with Islamic terrorism generally.

In broad terms, Obama’s strategy for dealing with radical Islamic terrorism and jihadist movements is to ignore their motivating ideologies, take minimal action to combat them, criticize other governments for failing to destroy IS and its jihadist brethren on their own, and attack Republicans for criticizing Obama’s strategy for defeating radical Islamic terrorism.

The new justification for Obama’s refusal to revise his strategy was first uttered by former secretary of state Hillary Clinton at the Democratic presidential debate on November 14. Five days later, the Democratic National Committee produced an ad attacking Republican presidential candidates based on this new rhetorical theme.

Obama himself resonated the new message during his press conference in Malaysia on Sunday.

According to the new taking points, Republicans have no right to criticize Obama, or Clinton, for their failure to contend with the nature of the enemy because in ignoring the enemy’s doctrine, ideology and strategic goals, they are merely following in president George W. Bush’s footsteps.

During the Democratic presidential debate, Clinton argued that refusing to identify the radical Islamic nature of the enemy that attacked the US on September 11 and in the months and years that followed “was one of the real contributions – despite all the other problems – that George W. Bush made after 9/11, when he basically said – after going to a mosque in Washington – we are not at war with Islam or Muslims.”

In its new ad, the DNC attacks five Republican presidential candidates that have stated in recent days that radical Islam is the force that is warring against the US and its allies.

To prove that the candidates are “unpresidential,” for naming the enemy, the DNC ad includes a clip of Bush’s speeches in praise of Islam as “a religion of peace,” which he delivered in the days immediately following the September 11 attacks.

The Democrats’ invocation of Bush as their counterterrorism authority and as a means to justify their refusal to use the term “radical Islam” is more than a bit ironic, of course, since they have spent the past 14 years pillorying Bush’s counterterrorism policies.

But it is also extremely helpful. By aligning with Bush to justify their refusal to discuss the radical Islamic foundations of the terrorist scourge facing the free world and devouring large swaths of the Middle East, the Democrats have given us the opportunity to consider what that refusal has meant for the US’s ability to lead the free world in its war against the forces of radical Islam.

At the time of the September 11 attacks, and for the first five years of Bush’s war on terrorism that followed them, Michael Gerson served as Bush’s chief speechwriter.

Gerson authored Bush’s statements about Islam being a religion of peace.

In November 2014, Gerson participated in a debate about the nature of Islam and the war on terror. Gerson explained that Bush’s decision to ignore the nature of the enemy emanated from a strategic calculation.

Bush believed that radical Islam was but a marginal force in the Muslim world. By embracing Islam as a whole, and insisting that the terrorists from al-Qaida and other groups did not reflect the authentic nature of Islam, Bush hoped to draw the non-radical Muslims to America’s side against the jihadists.

In Gerson’s words, “Every religious tradition has forces of tribalism and violence in its history, background and theology; and, every religious tradition has sources of respect for the other. And you emphasize, as a political leader, one at the expense of the other in the cause of democracy.”

Gerson continued, “That is a great American tradition that we have done with every religious tradition that comes to the United States – include them as part of a natural enterprise and praise them for their strongly held religious views, and emphasize those portions that are most compatible with those ideals.”

The flaws in this reasoning began surfacing immediately.

When Bush made his remarks about Islam after the September 11 attacks, he was flanked by Muslim leaders who were in short order exposed as terrorism apologists and financiers.

On the battlefield, by failing to acknowledge, let alone discredit the enemy’s world view, Bush made it all but impossible for Muslims who oppose radical Islam to stand up against it. After all, if the Americans didn’t think it was a problem, why would they? Since the Americans refused to admit the existence of radical Islam, the US refused to favor non-radical forces over radical ones. And so, in the 2005 Iraqi elections, while Iran spent a fortune financing the campaigns of its supporters, the US did nothing to support the Iraqi forces that shared the US’s goal of transforming Iraq into a multi-denominational, pluralistic democracy.

The results were preordained. The elected government took its cues from Iran, and as soon as US forces withdrew from Iraq, all of America’s hard won gains were squandered. The Iraqi government became an Iranian puppet. And in areas where Iran didn’t care to assert its control, al-Qaida-aligned forces that now comprise Islamic State rose once again.

Obama’s refusal to discuss radical Islam stems from a different source than Bush’s refusal to do so. Unlike Bush’s position, Obama’s insistence that IS, al-Qaida, Hamas, Boko Haram and their brethren have nothing to do with Islam does not owe to a strategic calculation on how to win a war. Rather, it stems from an ideological conviction that the US and the rest of the Western world have no right to cast aspersions on jihadists.

As Obama sees things, the problems in the Middle East, and the Middle Eastern terrorism plaguing the rest of the world, are the result of past Western imperialism and chauvinism. All anti-Western movements – including jihadist movements – are legitimate responses to what Obama perceives as the crime of Western power.

Obama’s peevish response to the massacre in Paris and his assaults on Republicans who argue that the religious convictions of Syrians requesting asylum in the US are relevant for determining whether or not to let them in have brought his refusal to identify the enemy to the forefront of the US debate on how to defeat IS.

This debate is clearly uncomfortable for liberal US media outlets. So they have sought to change the subject.

As the Democratic Party adopted Bush as its new counterterrorism guru, the liberal media sought to end discussion of radical Islam by castigating as bigots Republicans who speak of it. The media attempt over the weekend to claim falsely that Republican frontrunner Donald Trump called for requiring American Muslims to be registered in a national Muslim database marked such an attempt to change the subject.

The common denominator between Bush’s strategic decision to lie about the nature of the enemy, Obama’s apologetics for IS and the media’s attempt to claim that Republicans are anti-Islamic racists is that in all cases, an attempt is being made to assert that there is no pluralism in Islam – it’s either entirely good or entirely evil.

This absolutist position is counterproductive for two reasons. First, it gets you nowhere good in the war against radical Islam. The fact is that Islam per se is none of the US president’s business. His business is to defeat those who attack the US and to stand with America’s allies against their common foes.

Radical Islam may be a small component of Islam or a large one. But it certainly is a component of Islam. Its adherents believe they are good Muslims and they base their actions on their Islamic beliefs.

American politicians, warfighters and policymakers need to identify that form of Islam, study it and base their strategies for fighting the radical Islamic forces on its teachings.

Bush was wrong to lie about the Islamic roots of radical Islam. And his mistake had devastating strategic consequences for the world as a whole. It is fortuitous that the Clinton and the Democratic Party have embraced Bush’s failed strategy of ignoring the enemy for justifying their even more extreme position. Now that they have, they have given a green light to Republicans as well as Democrats who are appalled by Obama’s apologetics for radical Islam to learn from Bush’s mistakes and craft an honest and effective strategic approach to the challenge of radical Islam.

[Lenno]

Michelle Obama Marks Rosa Parks Birthday With A Picture Of . . . Barack Obama… How original.

[LouKy]

I am talking about the refugees who are chosen by the United Nations which does the first screening and then persuades westernized countries to take them PERMANENTLY—to make them voting citizens of their new first-world country.
When the Syrian civil war began in earnest, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres told western countries that they must take-in for permanent resettlement 130,000 Syrians (again, these are mostly Syrians in UN camps, not those who have decided to move west—invasion-style—on their own).

Thats been the plan for all along. Refugees are given the right to vote...live equally or better than the citizens of the host country. And its been the plan that they never leave.

Its all written in the below link if you feel like reading through 149 pages of UN BullS***.

http://www.ipu.org/pdf/publications/refugee_en.pdf